- Joined
- Jun 8, 2004
- Messages
- 54,899
- Reaction score
- 1,518
I'm referring to law-abiding American citizens.
Do you have a cop with you 24/7?
N.J. senator proposes toy gun ban
- Thread starter Barbaro
- Start date
morbid-mongoose
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2007
- Messages
- 504
- Reaction score
- 0
This is an excelent point. I'd never thought of that before.
I vote with Reba
" Good guy said they need a gun for protection, then that means bad guy can have it too."
The bad guys will always get guns - there's lots of them in England (where guns are totally banned) and the black market price in England isn't any higher than the legitimate gunshop price here. It's also already highly illegal for bad guys to have guns here, but they get them anyway. Laws are only effective on the law-abiding (duh!) so it's a truism that if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them.
"I just think (of course it's my opinion, not other people's) it's a lot more safe to depend on cops rather than on citizens for protection which is what lot of people did in other countries."
In times of trouble, a gun in the hand is far more effective than a cellphone (assuming you even have a signal.) In the average city it takes the police from about 8 to 45 minutes or more to respond to 911 calls. London metropolitan police (and I have personal experience of this) can take more than one hour (999 call). How many times could you get killed in that length of time? The courts have ruled that the police have ABSOLUTELY NO DUTY to protect you. Who else will do it?
Your logic assumes that if you take away guns from criminals, they will be forced to become law abiding. How exactly does this work?
" Good guy said they need a gun for protection, then that means bad guy can have it too."
The bad guys will always get guns - there's lots of them in England (where guns are totally banned) and the black market price in England isn't any higher than the legitimate gunshop price here. It's also already highly illegal for bad guys to have guns here, but they get them anyway. Laws are only effective on the law-abiding (duh!) so it's a truism that if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them.
"I just think (of course it's my opinion, not other people's) it's a lot more safe to depend on cops rather than on citizens for protection which is what lot of people did in other countries."
In times of trouble, a gun in the hand is far more effective than a cellphone (assuming you even have a signal.) In the average city it takes the police from about 8 to 45 minutes or more to respond to 911 calls. London metropolitan police (and I have personal experience of this) can take more than one hour (999 call). How many times could you get killed in that length of time? The courts have ruled that the police have ABSOLUTELY NO DUTY to protect you. Who else will do it?
Your logic assumes that if you take away guns from criminals, they will be forced to become law abiding. How exactly does this work?
